Research Paper on Same-Sex Marriage Essay Example

Research Paper on Same-Sex Marriage Essay Same-Sex Marriage Research Paper Homosexual relationships have been known for centuries, and even in the ancient world, such relationships have been commonly accepted. Still, the question whether it is natural or not, and whether the society should accept such relationships as normal, is a question with no certain answer. Another burning issue, which is especially heatedly discussed due to the recent changes in the legislation of different countries, is whether same-sex marriage should be legalized. The question of the essence of marriage is so heatedly protected by various groups due to its initial sacred meaning and the common understanding of a family as a union of two people of the opposite sex. Thus, the legitimacy and the general value of a homosexual family are controversial to the very essence of nature and religious preaches. Moreover, there is a growing concern whether homosexuality is a result of nature or nurture and thus does it threaten the human society as a limit to the normal family formation and child-bearing. We will write a custom essay sample on Research Paper on Same-Sex Marriage specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on Research Paper on Same-Sex Marriage specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on Research Paper on Same-Sex Marriage specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer Because human nature is still generally unknown and is a secret even to the scientists, the questions emerging from such obscure areas are treated with hostility. The question is how long will it take for the humanity to solve the questions of private and public concern, and will there ever be any consent among the people around the world on such delicate matters. Same-sex marriage history The history of same marriage battles of the XXth century is a succession of the heated debates pro and con the issue, with both minor and serious victories from either side. According to Glenn Timeline, the first case of same-sex couples seeking marriage licenses and other rights was on May 18, 1970, when Jack Baker, a student at University of Minnesota, unsuccessfully applies for a marriage license with his lover Jim McConnell. They do, however, manage to file joint tax returns in 1972 and 1973.† The same source states that on October 10th, 1987 the first large public same-sex wedding took place. Approximately two thousand same-sex couples are `married’ in a mass wedding on the steps of the Internal Revenue Service in Washington, DC on October 10. The ceremony is part of the 1987 March on Washington activities dramatizing the tax benefits for married people that lesbian and gay couples are denied.† The impact of other countries on the recognition of the same-sex marriage was also quite impressive, with several countries accepting such relationships as normal. For example, Holland was the first country to expand its definition of marriage to include both opposite-sex and same-sex couples in April 2001. Belgium followed it in January 2003. Next was Ontario, a province in Canada in June 2003. By November 2004, same-sex marriage had become available in most Canadian provinces (British Columbia, Manitoba, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland, Ontario, Quebec Saskatchewan) and one territory (Yukon). According to the statistics, over 82% of Canadian same-sex couples were able to marry in their province afterward. When federal law C-38 was signed into law on the 20th of July 2005, same-sex marriage theoretically became available across all of Canada. However, Prince Edward Island ignored the civil rights of same-sex couples and refused to issue marriage licenses to them for almost a month. Spain passed a law allowing same-sex couples to marry on the 29th of June 2005. Factors influencing public opinion Most people realize same-sex marriage is a reality, but it is quite difficult to recognize whether it is natural. Amy Hess, in her statement â€Å"Three Reasons To Pass A Constitutional Ban on Same-Sex Marriage,† claims that: â€Å"There are plenty of people who believe that gay and lesbian sexual relationships are just as legitimate, natural and healthy as heterosexual relationships. This belief, however, has been widely promoted by homosexual activists and does not have the scientific backing that supporters argue.† There is neither support pro nor con the fact that gays are born, and the sexual orientation is not a result of some psychological or pathological influence. The background of this distinction is too obscure, and that is what scares most people of heterosexual orientation. People are scared their children may fall victims of such psychological influence and, as a result, the whole society would suffer the non-traditional relationships that, in fact, are unable to produce descendants. Procreation is, actually, one of the most significant reasons while most people consider same-sex relationships to be unnatural. The question, too, is mixed and influenced by two ideas: first, that the homosexual relationships are non-standard and unnatural, and secondly, whether the recognition of such relationships as a marital union would not contradict the standard notion of marriage. It is commonly known that the key argument in support of same-sex marriage is that laws banning same-sex marriage are highly analogous to laws prohibiting interracial marriage; a ban on same-sex marriage can, therefore, be seen as a form of discrimination infringing upon the civil rights of same-sex couples. In response, opponents of same-sex marriage argue that men and women are fundamentally different from one another, whereas interracial couples still fit within the â€Å"one man and one woman† definition of marriage. Political Debates Politics is probably not the most persuasive and valuable example, but all the point should still be presented. The president of the US, although he is not very popular, called for a ban of the same sex marriages in 2004. He said the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act and laws banning same-sex marriage in 38 states â€Å"express an overwhelming consensus in our country for protecting the institution of marriage.† The Defense of Marriage Act, signed by President Clinton, prevents federal recognition of same-sex marriage and allows states to ignore same-sex licenses from outside their borders. The debate over marriage has continued. There was another issue of the heated discussion that took place recently: the Marriage Protection Amendment of June 2006. Previously, on July 14, 2004, the Senate voted on a procedural motion to debate the Marriage Protection Amendment (S.J. Res 40) which would have led to an eventual vote on the amendment. The effort failed, however, because 60 votes were needed to bring the bill to a vote. Forty-eight Senators voted in favor and 50 opposed. On Thursday, September 30, 2004, the House of Representatives voted on the Marriage Protection Amendment, H.J. Res. 106. A two-thirds majority is required to pass an amendment. The MPA received a simple majority with a vote of 227 to 186.It did not pass in 2006 either. The society is not ready to take any serious step for or against this controversial issue. And although uncertainty is not the best option, we hardly have any by now. Most common claims and refutations Scott Bidstrup in his essay â€Å"Gay Marriage: The Arguments and the Motives† summarizes the most common claims against marriage, such as: Marriage is an institution between one man and one woman. Same-sex couples aren’t the optimum environment in which to raise children. Gay relationships are immoral. Marriages are for procreation and ensuring the continuation of the species. Same-sex marriage would threaten the institution of marriage. Marriage is traditionally a heterosexual institution. Same-sex marriage is an untried social experiment. Same-sex marriage would start us down a â€Å"slippery slope† towards legalized incest, bestial marriage, polygamy and all kinds of other horrible consequences. Granting gays the right to marry is a â€Å"special† right. Sodomy should be illegal and was until very recently. Gay marriage would mean forcing businesses to provide benefits to same-sex couples on the same basis as opposite-sex couples. Gay marriage would force churches to marry gay couples when they have a moral objection to doing so. He also claims there are real reasons people oppose gay marriage, namely: Just not comfortable with the idea. It offends everything religion stands for. Marriage is a sacred institution. Gay sex is unnatural. Making love to another man betrays everything that is masculine. The thought of gay sex is repulsive. They might recruit. Of course, all these claims are disproved and derided in the essay of this free-lance writer and political activist who has been active in human rights issues and the gay rights movement, specializing in youth and marriage rights issues, since coming out as a gay man in 1994. Recent evidence supports most and legislation, especially on the example on the Denmark, which has accepted gay marriage long ago (although this statement is refuted in Stanley Kurtz’s articles â€Å"The End of Marriage in Scandinavia† and â€Å"Dutch Debate: Marriage is in decline in the Netherlands†). But even if Mr. Bidstrup was right and there would be no evidence opposing his statements, all this disproof of common statements sounds wonderfully convincing for those who seek to hear it. For the homophobes, religious people and conservatives, though, there are still numerous points to argue over. I believe that all humans have the right to freedom of choice, and if homosexuals seek justice, why shouldn’t homophobes? Do people have to be forced to accept the amendment (if it is accepted), even if they do not wish to? Let us now not discuss the reasons why people support or oppose the idea of same-sex marriage or same-sex relationships in general. By the way, in his essay, Scott Bidstrup states that â€Å"more than half of all people in the United States oppose gay marriage, even though three-fourths are otherwise supportive of gay rights. It means that many of the same people who are even passionately in favor of gay rights oppose gays on this one issue†. Why does it happen? Because the society is too conservative on the issue of marriage, Bidstrup would hint. But is it too bad actually? It is natural for humans to try to protect what they have known to be true (marriage is a union of a man and a woman). And opposing something that causes a cognitive dissonance i s quite comprehensive, if not normal. The fact that homosexual relationships are accepted in society might be explained by the fact that as long as such relationships do not interfere with somebody’s freedoms, they are understandable and acceptable. The change of the idea of marriage and the status of the same-same relationships would, in fact, influence the whole society, and even those to disapprove of it would be forced to accept it. And this is the violation of freedom rights for those who traditionally see marriage and do not want this notion to change the meaning for any sake possible. If those who pursue same-sex relationships do have the rights to freedom, why should the rest be deprived of it? I am sure one of the most active proponents of the traditional marriage is the religion. The teachings of the three most prominent religions in America – Christianity, Judaism, and Islam – all declare gay and lesbian sexual behavior to be immoral. Christians state that same-sex marriage goes against biblical teaching, for example, Genesis 19:5 (Sodom and Gomorrah Destroyed). Other passages are Leviticus 18:22, Leviticus 20:13, and in the New Testament of the Bible, First Corinthians 6:8-10 and Romans 1:24-27 which, by a literal interpretation, prescribes the death penalty for homosexual contact. Pope John Paul II, referring to same-sex marriage, said: â€Å"It is legitimate and necessary to ask oneself if this is not perhaps part of a new ideology of evil, perhaps more insidious and hidden, which attempts to pit human rights against the family and man.† By the way, it is Pope John Paul II has been well known for his liberal views on many aspects of life. Still, he disproved the idea of same-sex marriage, for marriage in its traditional sense is one of the most sacred values of the church. Of course, one could claim many other religions are not as strict and do not ban the idea, but what shall we do with the three most common? Should we ignore the majority? Why should we deprive them of their rights to have an opinion? I would rather refrain from supporting either part because there would always be persuasive and valuable arguments from both sides. But I believe that everyone has a right to a freedom of choice and neither side should be deprived of it.

The Grave by The Handpost by Thomas Hardy and Drunkard Of The River by Michael Anthony Essays

The Grave by The Handpost by Thomas Hardy and Drunkard Of The River by Michael Anthony Essays The Grave by The Handpost by Thomas Hardy and Drunkard Of The River by Michael Anthony Paper The Grave by The Handpost by Thomas Hardy and Drunkard Of The River by Michael Anthony Paper Essay Topic: Literature I am going to be comparing two short stories. The first story The Grave by The Handpost by Thomas Hardy, which was written in the ninth century; the other story was Drunkard Of The River which was written by Michael Anthony in the twentieth century. The Grave By The Handpost is set in a rural area called Wessex in England. The river Ortoire on the Caribbean island of Trinidad sets Michael Anthonys story Drunkard Of The River. The Grave By The Handpost and Drunkard Of The River have some differences, both the stories are written approximately one hundred years apart; but they also have similarities. The father son relationships, both stories are about regretting something, which has happened. Also they both have parts of the story that is in dialect. The Grave By The Handpost is about a man called Sargent Holway, who committed suicide. Sargent Holway committed suicide because he had a son who wanted to become a mechanic in spite of his fathers wish for him to follow in his footsteps and join the army. He persuaded his son Luke to go and join the army overseas but as a result of this he had a terrible time. He dreaded being in the army and sent a letter to his father telling his father that he hates him for making him join the army and he has made his life miserable we know this because Luke says that his life was a burden and a slavery, and bitterly criticized his father for advising him to embark on a career for which he felt unsuited. As a result of Luke sending his father the letter his father felt so upset that he shot himself in his head with his own shotgun. Because he committed suicide his body had to be buried at a crossroad because some Christians at that time believed that if you committed suicide you were not allowed to be buried in a graveyard so sergeant Holway had to be buried at a crossroad so the devil cannot take his soul. His son Luke Holway came back from the army a couple of days after his fathers death, he was told that his father had committed suicide due to his letter. Luke felt really upset that he was the reason why his father had committed suicide. Luke decided to try and restore his fathers honour, he tried to do this by removing his fathers corpse from the crossroads and move it to a churchyard down the road. However just when he was about to move his fathers corpse he was recalled back to the army; Luke Holway chose to go back to the army because he thought it would make his father proud. We know this because Luke said Ill try to show myself to be what my father wished me so Luke left the reburying of his father to the men of the choir. However when the choir dug up sergeant Holways corpse they found a large wooden stake through his heart, which in conclusion made it impossible to move the corpse, so they left the corpse at the crossroad. As the years passed by the priest of the church and all the men of the choir died. Luke Holway came back once again and could not find neither the choir men nor the priest so he went to the graveyard to see if he could find his fathers tombstone but could not find any trace of his fathers body in the graveyard. He then discovered that his fathers body still lay at the crossroad. Luke was very upset and lived in a cottage for years until he too committed suicide by shooting himself, before Luke killed himself he wrote a note requesting to be buried at the crossroad beside his father but by the time the note had been retrieved Luke Holways body had been buried in the local graveyard! The story Drunkard Of The River is about a boy called Sona, he is sent from his home up the river Ortoire by his mother to collect his father Mano from Assings shop in the village where he has been drinking heavily and is drunk. Sona is at home when his mother tells him to go and collect his father from Assings shop. When Sona was told this he got angry because he hated his father but his mother still loved Sonas father Mano as she said In her eyes he was still young. He did not grow old it was she who had aged. Sona left his home got out a boat and paddled up the river to the village; he got to Assings shop and Mano was drunk and making a fool of himself. Sona told his father Mano to come home but this enraged Mano and he said So, you is me father now, eh? in his drunken rage Mano staggered towards his son. Mano kicked Sona in his stomach and it took three people to hold back Mano he is me father now him modder send him for me struggling even more than ever Ill kill him, so help me God, Ill kill him! Mano then got on the boat with his son Sona. When they were on the boat; there was an indication in the story that Sona did something bad but it does not say what had happened in the context. Sona got home wi thout his father; his mother became suspicious and wanted to know where Sonas father Mano was. Sonas reply was He out there, sleeping he drunk. But when Sonas mother called for Mano, Sona was panic stricken and fled! A narrator looking back on the past tells The Grave By The Handpost is in the form of a flash back. Drunkard Of The River describes events as they happen and the writer leaves readers to work out things for themselves such as in the end of the story you do not know exactly what happened to Mano (in fact Sona pushed his father Mano into the river Ortoire). Micheal Anthony does not say what Sona had done to raise more sympathy for Sona and try to make the audience understand why Sona did it. The style which I prefer is the one which Micheal Anthony used because it makes you wonder what could of happened, it makes you understand why Sona did what he did and what frame of mind he was in when he did it. The main characters in The Grave By The Handpost are sergeant Holway and Luke Holway. Sargent Holway is an army veteran; he would like his son Luke to follow in his footsteps and become like him. Luke Holway is the son of sergeant Holway he wants to become a car mechanic but his father forced him to join the army. Luke hated it when he went to join the army overseas; Luke was not really built for the army. The main characters in Drunkard Of The River are Sona and Mano; Sona is a young boy who really hates his father also he dont understand why anyone could like his father especially his mother moreover Sona could not see why she bothered about his father at all for Mano was stupid and worthless and made their lives miserable. Sona is really distressed and feels he has no other alternative but to sort out his father himself Sona Often in silence he had shaken his fist and said, one day Ill.. Ill.. Mano is the father of Sona he is a very ignorant man who does not listen to his son and is not concerned about how he treats him. Mano always drinks heavily; he is an alcoholic. The relationship between characters; in particular the father son relations such as sergeant Holway and L uke Holway, and Sona and Mano, these relationships is one similarity between the two stories. These characters do not get on with each other; sergeant Holway committed suicide because of what Luke Holway had said about him; Sona could not stand his father Mano; Sona was getting fustrated by his father Mano until Sona had been pushed so far he murdered his father Mano. The characters in Drunkard Of The River are Mano, his wife, their son Sona and Assing the owner of the shop where Mano drinks. There are also some villagers. Mano is the father of Sona; Mano is a drunk, an alcoholic and a very unreliable father. Sona hates his father they have a very dysfunctional relationship. Sona is the son of Mano he is angry that Mano is a drunk and not a proper father. Sonas mother is a very distressed woman, she loves Mano and thinks she has changed not Mano in her eyes he was still young. He did not grow old it was she who had aged. He had only turned out badly. In the Grave By The Handpost the action takes place in three main places; Long Ash Lane Crossroads, Chalk Newton and Chalk Newton Church Yard. Drunkard Of The River is set in a small village on the Caribbean island of Trinidad. We know this because Sona and his family live by the river Ortoire; we can tell it is set on a Caribbean island because of the dialect they use when they speak. In the story The Grave By The Handpost there are parts of the story where the characters do not speak Standard English; they speak Wessex dialect such as when Lot Swanhills said who mid ye be a burying there? which means who will be buried there. Also when Erza Cattstock says Jown it- weve never played to a dead man afore which in standard English is Damn it-we have never played for a dead man before. Moreover there is a part in the story when a man says to Luke Holway no, no dont ye take on so, young man which translates into Dont you get so angry young man. The writer Thomas Hardy does this to show that it is set in the countryside and to add to the effect of the story being set in a rural part of England. In the story Drunkard Of The River there are phrases which are not spoken in standard English but spoken in island d ialect such as when Sona said Ma say to come home which means Mother said come home; also when Mano says to Sona So you is me father now, eh which in standard English is so you are my father now. Micheal Anthony chose to do this to add to the effect of being on the island of Trinidad. An important event that happened in The Grave By The Handpost is when sergeant Holway receives a letter from from his son Luke Holway telling him how much he hates him and it is his fathers fault why he despises his life, this was a key thing because this was the cause of sergeant Holway committing suicide. Another key event that happened in the story is when Luke went off to join the army after his father had committed suicide Luke left the reburying of his father to the men of the choir to do. But they were frightened that when they dug up the grave at the crossroad they would find that a stake (which would have been put through his heart to prevent the devil taking his soul) had been put through sergeant Holway heart which would make it impossible for the men of the choir to move sergeant Holways corpse. So they left the body at the crossroads. A few years later Luke had come back and discovered that his fathers body had not been moved; this was a key event because Luke Holway thought he had restored his fathers honour but he hadnt. Also a key moment in the story is when Luke Holway lived in a little cottage by himself because he was depressed about his father. Luke committed suicide because he wanted to join his father. Luke left a note when he died saying he wanted to be buried at the crossroads beside his father but by the time the note was read his body was buried in the graveyard. This was an important factor because it shows the readers to what depth Luke Holway had sunk to during his depression and it also reveals how he never forgave himself for his fathers death. I think the most important events, which happened throughout Drunkard Of The River, are when Sona goes to Assings shop to collect his father but his father Mano gets angry and kicks him in the stomach. This is an important event because it changes the mood of the story and makes Sonas hatred for Mano build up even more inside. Another important event is when Sona and Mano are on the boat going home, but Sona arrives home by himself. When Sonas mother asks where Mano is; Sona starts to panic and runs away. This is also a key event because it shows us that Sona had done something bad and that Sona could have possibly killed his father Mano.